Opinion of the Issue, part 42

[Verily]

Lean No. Children shouldn't be forced into anything.

Children generally aren't capable of making major life decisions, that's sort of why they have parents.

He might be misunderstanding "public school", which means a particularly posh kind of private boarding school in Britain. American/Canadian/Australian (? on the last) "public school" would be British "state school".

[SPC]

No. Let the parents decide how to educate their child.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

You seem to be misunderstanding. You seem to be implying that masses of children will go without education if education becomes voluntary. I don't believe so.

The thing is, I can remember being a child pretty well and don't have a particularly idealistic view of childhood and children. I don't think that most children would go to school, or bother to turn up at lessons, if compulsion was removed. Not enough, anyway.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Most parents have neither the time nor the money to educate their children at home. Furthermore, the tragic reality is that the culture of "self-education" has declined along with all other communal and mutual activities in the horrific onslaught of consumerism and mass culture. It would not magically return just because it suddenly became urgently needed; things don't work like that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not quite sure what you're arguing here; is it that manual labour is on the way out (a laughable suggestion, frankly) or the education system acts as though it must be and fails to properly educate children likely to go into manual jobs (a position that I would agree with, actually) or something else?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't give a damn about "the market" (strictly speaking I don't even believe in "it"). What matters to me is that children lean how to read and write, learn about the World that they live in, learn what they need to to become good citizens and learn what they need to to get a decent job at the end of it (or go onto university or whatever) so that they can provide for themselves and their families. I will admit that this sometimes seems almost as utopian as what you're advocating, a fact that is just a little depressing.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My free will as expressed at the age of five should not be holding me back at the age of fifty.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This may be true (in certain cases it certainly is). But it's not nearly as much a waste as having large numbers of people unable to read a book and unable to write their own names.

[dead0man]

Hard no.  "force" and "mandatory" are horrible words to me.

[Earth]

You seem to be misunderstanding. You seem to be implying that masses of children will go without education if education becomes voluntary. I don't believe so.

The thing is, I can remember being a child pretty well and don't have a particularly idealistic view of childhood and children. I don't think that most children would go to school, or bother to turn up at lessons, if compulsion was removed. Not enough, anyway.

I'd venture to say, at least from experience, a lot of children and their parents don't realize that education is mandatory. It's actually irrelevant to most. Yet that hasn't been the push for children to attend.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Most parents have neither the time nor the money to educate their children at home.

True, although this says nothing about it being compulsory.

Furthermore, the tragic reality is that the culture of "self-education" has declined along with all other communal and mutual activities in the horrific onslaught of consumerism and mass culture. It would not magically return just because it suddenly became urgently needed; things don't work like that.

I never said it would, but once again, this has little to do with the mandatory nature of modern public education.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not quite sure what you're arguing here; is it that manual labour is on the way out (a laughable suggestion, frankly) or the education system acts as though it must be and fails to properly educate children likely to go into manual jobs (a position that I would agree with, actually) or something else?

It's hardly laughable, at least in this country. I'm arguing against the notion that forced attendance is somehow a benefit, when even in a voluntary situation, most children would probably still attend. Force is never a good motivation for learning.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't give a damn about "the market" (strictly speaking I don't even believe in "it"). What matters to me is that children lean how to read and write, learn about the World that they live in, learn what they need to to become good citizens and learn what they need to to get a decent job at the end of it (or go onto university or whatever) so that they can provide for themselves and their families. I will admit that this sometimes seems almost as utopian as what you're advocating, a fact that is just a little depressing.

You may not, but this is the impetus that public education operates under; capable future workers, not knowledgeable individuals. Reading is prerequisite in our culture, not so that they'll understand literature, or that it'll foster critical thinking.

Once again, I agree with what you write, but it adds nothing to a discuss of mandatory education.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My free will as expressed at the age of five should not be holding me back at the age of fifty.

It's not only five year olds that are effected, but parents. That is my point, not that a five year old's want should be given precedence.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This may be true (in certain cases it certainly is). But it's not nearly as much a waste as having large numbers of people unable to read a book and unable to write their own names.

Most posters that agree with mandatory education seem to be operating under the notion that somehow children will, en masse, run away from education to never been seen again. I think it's fairly ridiculous. This view essentially treats children as second class citizens, without a mind of their own, justifying coercion for their own "good". I don't believe much would change if education becomes voluntary.

[Mint]

Most posters that agree with mandatory education seem to be operating under the notion that somehow children will, en masse, run away from education to never been seen again. I think it's fairly ridiculous. This view essentially treats children as second class citizens, without a mind of their own, justifying coercion for their own "good". I don't believe much would change if education becomes voluntary.

Children don't have full rights, nor should they. Children are by nature at various stages of development. Some may be able to grasp the consequences of skipping school, others may not. And some may know and just not care (I've been there). It may be that with a voluntary system, most parents would insist on their kids going to school or else. But it would be a mistake to assume that 5-12 year olds (and even some teens) are generally capable of making such major life decisions.

That is not to say that I think there should be a one size fits all, 100% public approach to education. Far from it, I view the public school system as in need of serious reforms. I would prefer a voucher/charter centered system with the option of apprenticeship or (in rare cases) home school for some. And I'm totally opposed to the Department of Education, No Child Left Behind, etc. But there needs to be some sort of safety net in place to ensure that children are learning something.

[Lunar]

Hard no.  "force" and "mandatory" are horrible words to me.

I'm going to force you to accept the possibility of choosing if you get a trillion dollars in charitable contributions from voluntary donors and if you do decide to accept this, I'll have it be mandated that you give 0.000001% of the money in send out thank you's to these nice people

[Torie]

No!  But of course educational attendance (or home schooling with testing) should be mandatory. I am not in favor of making private schools illegal however. That is nutter.

[RI]

No!  But of course educational attendance (or home schooling with testing) should be mandatory. I am not in favor of making private schools illegal however. That is nutter.

This.

[Sensei]

of course not. If people want their kids indoctrinated or in a really expensive school or both, it's their prerogative.

[Associate Justice PiT]

No!  But of course educational attendance (or home schooling with testing) should be mandatory. I am not in favor of making private schools illegal however. That is nutter.

This.

     Agreed. Good to see somebody understood the question.

[Lief 🗽]

They should be required to attend some sort of school. Home-schooling should be banned. Private schooling is fine, I suppose, as long as children are being tough the same things (generally) that they are taught in public schools.

[Keystone Phil]

They must attend a school within the public school system?

Absolute joke question.

[Earth]

Children don't have full rights, nor should they.

What potential "full rights" are we talking about? This is too vague for me.

Children are by nature at various stages of development. Some may be able to grasp the consequences of skipping school, others may not.

Exactly, so I say leave it up to the parents to decide. If there's one thing that pisses me off is the need to speak for another, as a complete stranger can dictate to another how their child should socialize. Not the place of the government.

I understand your point, but it's still based in the silly idea that voluntary education equates 'mass desertion'. The issue to me, is parents should not have to face legal consequences for their child's absence.

But it would be a mistake to assume that 5-12 year olds (and even some teens) are generally capable of making such major life decisions.

Yes it would, which is why parents should make that decision for them.

[paul718]

They must attend a school within the public school system?

Absolute joke question.

Yeah.    Am I missing something here?  What is the argument against private schools?  I've never even heard of this being an "issue" before.

[dead0man]

Because some private schools are Christian, the authoritarian athiests think private schools should be banned.

"ZEE STATE MUST HOLD ZA MONOPOLY ON ZA EDUCATION OF OUR YOUTHS."

[Scam of God]

Because some private schools are Christian, the authoritarian athiests think private schools should be banned.

"ZEE STATE MUST HOLD ZA MONOPOLY ON ZA EDUCATION OF OUR YOUTHS."

Yeah, pretty much. The Religious Right has totally infiltrated the home-school movement, for instance.

[dead0man]

Because some private schools are Christian, the authoritarian athiests think private schools should be banned.

"ZEE STATE MUST HOLD ZA MONOPOLY ON ZA EDUCATION OF OUR YOUTHS."

Yeah, pretty much. The Religious Right has totally infiltrated the home-school movement, for instance.

Yet thousands (millions?) of kids are homeschooled in totally non-Christian environments and the anti-homeschoolers care nothing for them.  They just want to force the kids back into (often) sh**tty schools. 

Just because some people abuse something doesn't mean we should ban that thing.

[paul718]

Because some private schools are Christian, the authoritarian athiests think private schools should be banned.

"ZEE STATE MUST HOLD ZA MONOPOLY ON ZA EDUCATION OF OUR YOUTHS."

Yeah, pretty much. The Religious Right has totally infiltrated the home-school movement, for instance.

Well, that's not where I'm confusded.  I don't know anything about home-schooling, so I can't opine.  But what's the argument against private schooling?

[Scam of God]

Because some private schools are Christian, the authoritarian athiests think private schools should be banned.

"ZEE STATE MUST HOLD ZA MONOPOLY ON ZA EDUCATION OF OUR YOUTHS."

Yeah, pretty much. The Religious Right has totally infiltrated the home-school movement, for instance.

Well, that's not where I'm confusded.  I don't know anything about home-schooling, so I can't opine.  But what's the argument against private schooling?

Oh, I don't have one. If they have any basis at all in religion, however, they should receive absolutely no support from the Federal government. That imbecile redneck Bush came very close to outright funding them.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I just don't like private schools. Too authoritarian, they're for rich people, they often make kids wear uniforms, etc.

[Lief 🗽]

Because some private schools are Christian, the authoritarian athiests think private schools should be banned.

"ZEE STATE MUST HOLD ZA MONOPOLY ON ZA EDUCATION OF OUR YOUTHS."

Yeah, pretty much. The Religious Right has totally infiltrated the home-school movement, for instance.

Well, that's not where I'm confusded.  I don't know anything about home-schooling, so I can't opine.  But what's the argument against private schooling?

Oh, I don't have one. If they have any basis at all in religion, however, they should receive absolutely no support from the Federal government. That imbecile redneck Bush came very close to outright funding them.

What about colleges/universities that have a religious affiliation? Would you apply the same zero funding standards to those?

[Scam of God]

Because some private schools are Christian, the authoritarian athiests think private schools should be banned.

"ZEE STATE MUST HOLD ZA MONOPOLY ON ZA EDUCATION OF OUR YOUTHS."

Yeah, pretty much. The Religious Right has totally infiltrated the home-school movement, for instance.

Well, that's not where I'm confusded.  I don't know anything about home-schooling, so I can't opine.  But what's the argument against private schooling?

Oh, I don't have one. If they have any basis at all in religion, however, they should receive absolutely no support from the Federal government. That imbecile redneck Bush came very close to outright funding them.

What about colleges/universities that have a religious affiliation? Would you apply the same zero funding standards to those?

Absolutely. I don't think the government should be in the business of funding education at all - though it certainly ought to have prerogative over the material taught - but, if it remains as it is, then no religiously affiliated school ought to receive a single cent from the Fed.

[dead0man]

I just don't like private schools. Too authoritarian, they're for rich people, they often make kids wear uniforms, etc.

Well yeah, generally they are for the super spoiled.  I dislike those people too.  But we shouldn't ban things we don't like/don't understand.

[paul718]

I just don't like private schools. Too authoritarian,

Not really.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

False.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not such a bad thing.  You don't have to worry about what to wear when you wake up in the morning.  Secondly, it has a psychological effect -- letting the kids know that they're in school, and not hanging out.  Thirdly, some public schools require uniforms.